I've made the point a few times now, and would appreciate a response.
Why are we preferring to seed WebApps speech with [2] when we already
have [3] that represents industry consensus as of a month ago (Google
not withstanding)? Proceeding with [2] would almost surely delay the
resulting specification as functionality would patched and haggled over
to meet consensus.
My counter proposal is to open the HTML/speech marriage in WebApps
essentially where we left off at [3]. The only variants being: 1)
Dropping the markup bindings in sections 7.1.2/7.1.3 because its primary
supporter has since expressed non-interest, and 2) Spin the protocol
specification in 7.2 out to the IETF. If I need to formalize all of
this in a document, please let me know.
Thank you
[3] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/htmlspeech/XGR-htmlspeech/
-----Original Message-----
From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 4:31 AM
To: public-webapps
Cc: public-xg-htmlspeech@w3.org
Subject: CfC: to add Speech API to Charter; deadline January 19
Glen Shires and some others at Google proposed [1] that WebApps add
Speech API to WebApps' charter and they put forward the Speech
Javascript API Specification [2] as as a starting point. Members of
Mozilla and Nuance have voiced various levels of support for this
proposal. As such, this is a Call for Consensus to add Speech API to
WebApps' charter.
Positive response to this CfC is preferred and encouraged and silence
will be considered as agreeing with the proposal. The deadline for
comments is January 19 and all comments should be sent to public-webapps
at w3.org.
-AB
[1]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/1696.html
[2]
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011OctDec/att-1696/s
peechapi.html